''•y-m 


..    i 


SOME  OF  DR.  CHARLES  A,  BRIGGS'  VIEWS, 

PUBLISHED  SINCE  HIS  SUSPENSION 

BY  THE   GENERAL 

ASSEMBLY. 


SOME  OF  DR.  CHARLES  A.  BRIGGS'  VIEWS, 

PUBLISHED  SINCE  HIS  SUSPENSION 

BY  THE   GENERAL 

ASSEMBLY. 


SOME  OF  DR.  CHARLES  A.  BRIGGS'  VIEWS,  PUBLISHED 

SINCE  HIS  SUSPENSION  BY  THE  GENERAL 

ASSEMBLY. 


The  followiug  comj^arison  of  the  erroneous  views  advanced  by  Dr. 
Charles  A.  Briggs  in  his  Inaugural  Address,  for  which,  on  Charges  and 
Specifications  regularly  made  and  sustained,  he  was  suspended  from 
the  Gospel  Ministry  by  the  General  Assembl}^  of  1893,  with  utterances 
which  he  has  made  since  then,  clearly  shows  not  onh'  that  he  has  re- 
affirmed those  erroneous  views,  but  that  he  is  actively  engaged  in 
propagating  them,  and  that  he  has,  in  some  resj^ects,  dejjarted  still 
further  from  orthodox  positions. 

In  the  column  on  the  left  will  be  found  some  of  the  Charges  and 
Specifications,  together  with  the  extracts  from  the  Inaugural  Address 
on  which  they  were  based,  and  on  the  ground  of  which  he  was  con- 
demned. The  right-hand  column  contains  extracts :  (1)  From  an 
address  on  *'  The  Truthfulness  of  Hoi}-  Scripture,"  which  Dr.  Briggs 
delivered  in  the  City  of  Chicago,  September,  1893,  at  the  World's 
Parliament  of  Religions,  and  which  is  published  in  a  book  which  bears 
the  name  of  The  World's  Parliament  of  Religions  ;  (2)  From  an  article 
published  over  his  name  in  The  Forum  for  November,  1898,  on  "The 
Alienation  of  Church  and  Peoj^le'';  (3)  From  another  article  published 
by  him  in  The  North  American  Review,  for  January,  1894,  on  "  The  Sun- 
day School  and  Modern  Criticism." 

PKESBYTEKY  OF  NEW  YORK.  In    The   Forum,    November,  1893,  ON 

^        ^                           ■ ,  PAGE  367,  Dr.  Briggs  says  : 
The  Presbyterian   Church  in  the 

United  States  of  America  "Therefore,   those  who  have  been 

AGAINST  trained  in  the  thought  of  the  age,  the 

The  Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.  whole  class  of  learned  men,  are  out  of 

sympathy    with    the    denominations. 

amended  charges  and  specifica-  jj^)^  can  a  man  of  science  have  any 
tions  ' 
'_  patience  with  the  doctrine  of  cn^ation 

Charge  I.  and  the  theory  of  miracles  and  proph- 
The  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  ecy  which  are  commonly  taugiit  in 
United  States  of  America  charges  the  theological  schools,  and  from  Chris- 
Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  being  a  tian  pulpits  ?  How  can  a  man  who 
Minister  of  the  said  Church  and  a  has  been  trained  in  modern  psychol- 
member  of  the  Presbytery  of  New  ogy,  metaphysics  and  ethics  fail  to 
York,  with  teaching  that  the  Reason  be  repelled   by  the   crude  philosophy 


is  a  fountain  of  divine  aiithprity  which 
may  and  does  savingly  enlighten  men, 
even  such  men  as  reject  the  Scriptures 
as  the  authoritative  proclamation  of 
the  will  of  God  and  reject  also  the  way 
of  salvation  through  the  mediation  and 
sacrifice  of  the  Son  of  God  as  revealed 
therein ;  which  is  contrary  to  the  es- 
sential doctrine  of  the  Holy  Scripture 
and  of  the  Standards  of  the  said 
Church,  that  the  Holy  Scripture  is 
most  necessary,  and  the  rule  of  faith 
and  practice. 

SPECIFICATION  I. 

In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said  Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D., 
delivered  at  the  Union  Theological 
Seminary  in  the  City  of  New  York, 
January  20th,  1891,  on  the  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  the  Edward  Robin- 
son Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  published  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  approval  of  the  said  Rev. 
Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been 
republished  by  him  in  a  second  edition 
with  a  preface  and  an  appendix,  there 
occur  the  following  sentences  : 

Page  21,  lines  7-10  and  31-33  : 
"  Divine  authority  is  the  only  author- 
ity to  which  man  can  yield  implicit 
obedience,  on  which  he  can  rest  in 
loving  certaintj^  and  build  with  joyous 
confidence.  *  *  *  There  are  histor- 
ically three  great  fountains  of  divine 
authority — the  Bible,  the  Church,  and 
the  Reason." 

Page  27,  lines  9  to  21 : 

"Martineau  could  not  find  divine 
authority  in  the  Church  or  the  Bible, 
but  he  did  find  God  enthroned  in  his 
own  soul.  There  are  those  who  would 
refuse  these  rationalists  a  place  in  the 
company  of  the  faithful.  But  thej^ 
forget  that  the  essential  thing  is  to 
find  God  and  divine  certainty,  and  if 
these  men  have  found  God  without 
the  mediation   of  Church   and  Bible, 


that  underlies  the  dogmas  of  systems 
of  theology  which  are  regarded  as  the 
standards  of  orthodoxy  ?  How  can 
such  a  man  look  with  complacency 
upon  the  battle  over  the  doctrine  of 
original  sin  between  creationism  and 
traducianism,  or  the  discussion  of  the 
freedom  of  the  will  ?  How  can  he  en- 
gage to  dishonor  the  reason,  to  divest 
himself  of  his  conscience,  or  to  assent 
to  the  unethical  dogma  of  immediate 
sanctification,  whether  in  this  life  or 
in  any  other  life  ?  How  can  the  man 
who  has  been  trained  in  modern  his- 
torical investigation  accept  the  tradi- 
tional denominational  history,  with  so 
many  spurious  claims  that  will  not 
bear  the  strain  of  historical  criticism?" 


Church  and  Bible  are  means  and  not 
ends;  they  are  avenues  to  God,  but 
are  not  God.  We  regret  that  these 
rationalists  depreciate  the  means  of 
grace  so  essential  to  most  of  us,  but 
we  are  warned  lest  we  commit  a  sim- 
ilar error,  and  depreciate  the  reason 
and  the  Christian  consciousness." 

Inaugural  Address,  Appendix,  Sec- 
ond Edition,  pages  88,  89  : 

*'  (c.)  Unless  God's  authority  is  dis- 
cerned in  the  forms  of  the  Keason, 
there  is  no  ground  upon  which  any  of 
the  heathen  could  ever  have  been 
saved,  for  they  know  nothing  of  Bible 
or  Church.  If  tliej'  are  not  savingly 
enlightened  by  the  Light  of  the  World 
in  the  forms  of  the  lleason  the  whole 
heathen  world  is  lost  forever." 

SPECIFICATION  II. 

In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said  Eev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D., 
delivered  at  the  Union  Theological 
Seminary  in  the  City  of  New  York, 
January  20th,  1891,  on  the  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  the  Edward  Eobin- 
son  Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  published  and  exten- 
sively circulated  with  the  knowledge 
and  approval  of  the  said  Rev.  Charles 
A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been  repub- 
lished by  him  in  a  second  edition  with 
a  preface  and  an  appendix,  there  occur 
the  following  sentences : 

Page  28,  lines  1  to  22  : 

"(3.)  The  Authority  of  Holy  Scrip- 
ture.— We  have  examined  the  Church 
and  the  Reason  as  seats  of  divine 
authority  in  an  introduction  to  our 
theme,  the  Authority  of  the  Scriptures, 
because  they  open  our  eyes  to  see 
mistakes  that  are  common  to  the  three 
departments.  Protestant  Christianity 
builds  its  faith  and  life  on  the  divine 
authority  contained  in  the  Scriptures, 
and  too  often  depreciates  the  Church 
and  the  Reason.  Spurgeon  is  an  ex- 
ample of  the  average  modern  Evangel- 


ical,  who  holds  the  Protestant  posi- 
tion, and  assails  the  Church  and  Rea- 
son in  the  interest  of  the  authority  of 
Scripture.  But  the  average  opinion 
of  the  Christian  world  would  not  as- 
sign him  a  higher  place  in  the  kingdom 
of  God  than  Martineau  or  Newman. 
May  we  not  conclude,  on  the  whole, 
that  these  three  representative  Chris- 
tians of  our  time,  living  in  or  near  the 
world's  metropolis,  have,  each  in  his 
way,  found  God  and  rested  on  divine 
authority  ?  May  we  not  learn  from 
them  not  to  depreciate  any  of  the 
means  wherebj^  God  makes  himself 
known  to  men  ?  Men  are  influenced 
bj'  their  temperaments  and  environ- 
ments  which  of  the  three  ways  of 
access  to  God  they  may  pursue." 


Charge  II. 
The  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  charges  the 
Eev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  being  a 
Minister  of  the  said  Church  and  a 
member  of  the  Presbytery  of  New 
York,  with  teaching  that  the  Church 
is  a  fountain  of  divine  authority  which, 
apart  from  the  Holy  Scripture,  may 
and  does  savingly  enlighten  men ; 
which  is  contrary  to  the  essential 
doctrine  of  the  Holy  Scripture  and  of 
the  Standards  of  the  said  Church,  that 
the  Holy  Scripture  is  most  necessary 
and  the  rule  of  faith  and  practice. 

SPECIFICATION  I. 

In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said  Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D., 
delivered  at  the  Union  Theological 
Seminary  in  the  City  of  New  York, 
Januai-y  20th,  1891,  on  the  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  the  Edward  Robin- 
son Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  published  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  approval  of  the  said  Rev. 
Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been 


In  The  Forum  for  November,  1893, 
ON  PAGE  370,  Dr.  Briggs  says: 
♦'  As  a  sign  of  the  times,  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  United  States  of  America  in  this 
year  1893,  declared  it  to  be  heterodox 
to  say  that  the  Church  is  a  great  foun- 
tain of  divine  authority,  and  virtually 
assumed  the  position  that  the  Presby- 
terian Church  is  nothing  more  than  a 
voluntary  society,  a  religious  club,  in 
which  the  supreme  obligation  is  in 
the  contract  assumed  by  the  vow  of 
subscription  at  ordination." 


repubiisheil  by  him  in  a  seeoiul  edilioii 
with  a  preface  and  an  appendix,  tiiere 
occur  the  following  sentences  : 
Page  25,  lines  1  to  14,  inchisive  : 
♦'  (1 .)  The  Authority  of  the  Church.— 
The  majority  of  Christians  from  tlie 
apostolic  age  have  found  God  through 
the  Church.  Martyrs  and  Saints, 
Fathers  and  Schoolmen,  the  profound- 
est  intellects,  the  saintliest  lives,  have 
had  this  experience.  Institutional 
Christianity  has  been  to  them  the 
presence-chamber  of  God.  Thoy  have 
therein  and  thereby  entered  into  com- 
munion w4th  all  saints.  It  is  difficult 
for  many  Protestants  to  regard  this 
experience  as  any  other  than  pious 
illusion  and  delusion.  But  what  shall 
we  say  of  a  modern  like  Newman,  who 
could  not  reach  certainty,  striving 
never  so  hard,  through  the  Bible  or 
the  Keason,  but  who  did  find  divine 
authority  in  the  institutions  of  the 
Church?" 

The  first  and  last  citations  from 
the  Inaugural  under  Charge  I.,  given 
above,  were  repeated  under  this 
Charge. 


Chakge  III. 
The  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  charges  the 
Eev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  being  a 
Minister  of  the  said  Church  and  a 
member  of  the  Presbytery  of  New 
York,  with  teaching  tliat  errors  maj- 
have  existed  in  tlie  original  text  of 
the  Holy  Scripture,  as  it  came  from 
its  authors,  which  is  contrar3^  to  the 
essential  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy 
Scripture  and  in  the  Standards  of  the 
said  Church,  that  the  Holy  Scripture 
is  the  Word  of  God  written,  immedi- 
ately inspired,  and  the  rule  of  faith 
and  practice. 

specification: 
In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said   Rev.   Charles  A.    Briggs,    D.  D., 


At  the  Woklds  Parliament  of  Re- 
ligions, Dr.  Briggs  said  : 

"The  question  thus  forces  itself 
upon  us,  can  we  maintain  the  truth- 
fulness of  these  Holy  Scriptures  in 
the  face  of  all  these  modern  sciences  V 
We  are  obliged  to  admit  that  there  are 
scientific  errors  in  the  Bible,  errors  of 
astronomy,  of  geology,  of  zoology,  of 
botany,  and  of  anthropology.  In  all 
these  respects  there  is  no  evidence 
that  the  authors  of  these  sacred  writ- 
ings had  any  other  knowledge  than 
that  possessed  by  their  contempo- 
raries."—p.  652. 

"There  are  historical  mistakes  in 
the  Christian  Scriptures,  mistakes  of 
chronology  and  geography,  errors  of 
historical  events  and  i)orsons,  discrep- 


8 


delivered  at  the  Union  Tlieological 
Seminary  in  tlie  City  of  New  Yorlc, 
January  20th,  1891,  on  tlie  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  the  Edward  Robin- 
son Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  published  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  approval  of  the  said  Eev. 
Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been 
republished  by  him  in  a  second  edition 
with  a  preface  and  an  appendix,  there 
occur  the  following  sentences,  be- 
ginning with  line  4  of  page  85  : 

"I  shall  venture  to  affirm  that,  so 
far  as  I  can  see,  there  are  errors  in 
the  Scriptures  that  no  one  has  been 
able  to  explain  away ;  and  the  theory 
that  they  were  not  in  the  original  text 
is  sheer  assumption,  upon  which  no 
mind  can  rest  with  certainty.  If  such 
errors  destroy  the  authority  of  the 
Bible,  it  is  already  destroyed  for  his- 
torians. Men  cannot  shut  their  eyes 
to  truth  and  fact.  But  on  what 
authority  do  these  theologians  drive 
men  from  the  Bible  by  this  theory  of 
inerrancy?  The  Bible  itself  nowhere 
makes  this  claim.  The  creeds  of  the 
Church  nowhere  sanction  it.  It  is  a 
ghost  of  modern  evangelicalism  to 
frighten  children.  The  Bible  has 
maintained  its  authority  with  the  best 
scholars  of  our  time,  who  with  open 
minds  have  been  willing  to  recognize 
any  error  that  might  be  pointed  out 
by  Historical  Criticism ;  for  these 
errors  are  all  in  the  circumstantials 
and  not  in  the  essentials ;  they  are  in 
the  human  setting,  not  in  the  precious 
jewel  itself;  they  are  found  in  that 
section  of  the  Bible  that  theologians 
commonly  account  for  from  the  provi- 
dential superintendence  of  the  mind 
of  the  author,  as  distinguished  from 
divine  revelation  itself.  It  may  be 
tliatthis  providential  superintendence 
gives  infallible  guidance  in  every  par- 
ticular; and  it  may  be  that  it  differs 
but  little,  if  at  all,  from  the  providen- 
tial superintendence  of  the  fathers  and 


ancles  and  inconsistencies  in  the 
historians,  which  cannot  be  removed 
by  any  proper  method  of  interpreta- 
tion. All  such  errors  are  just  where 
you  would  expect  to  find  them  in  ac- 
curate, truthful  writers  in  ancient 
times.  They  used  with  fidelity  the 
best  sources  of  information  accessible 
to  them ;  ancient  poems,  popular  tra- 
ditions, legends  and  ballads,  regal  and 
family  archives,  codes  of  law  and 
ancient  narratives.  There  is  no  evi- 
dence that  they  received  any  of  this 
history  bj''  revelation  from  God. 
There  is  no  evidence  that  the  Divine 
Spirit  corrected  their  narratives,  either 
when  they  were  lying  uncomposed  in 
their  minds  or  written  in  manu- 
scripts."— p.  652. 

"God  spake  in  much  the  greater 
part  of  the  Old  Testament  through  the 
voices  and  pens  of  the  human  authors 
of  the  Scriptures.  Did  the  human 
voice  and  pen,  in  all  the  numerous 
writers  and  editors  of  Holy  Scripture, 
prior  to  the  completion  of  the  Canon, 
always  deliver  an  inerrant  word  ? 
Even  if  all  th§  writers  were  so  pos- 
sessed of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  to  be 
merely  passive  in  his  hands,  the  ques- 
tion arises  :  Can  the  finite  voice  and 
the  finite  pen  deliver  and  express  the 
inerrant  truth  of  God  ?  If  the  lan- 
guage, and  the  style,  and  the  dialect, 
and  the  rhetoric  are  all  natural  to  the 
inspired  man,  is  it  possible  for  these 
to  express  the  infinite  truth  of  God  ? 
How  can  an  imperfect  word,  sentence 
and  clause  express  a  perfect  divine 
truth  ?  It  is  evident  that  the  writers 
of  the  Bible  were  not,  as  a  rule,  in  the 
ecstatic  state.  The  Holy  Spirit  did 
not  move  their  hands  or  their  lips. 
He  suggested  to  their  minds  and 
hearts  the  divine  truth  they  were  to 
teach.  They  received  it  by  intuition 
in  the  forms  of  their  reason ;  they 
framed  it  in  conception'^  in  imagina- 
tion and  in  fancy.  They  delivered  it 
in  the  logical  and  rhetorical  forms  of 


schoolmen  and  theologians  of  the 
Christian  Church.  It  is  not  important 
for  our  purpose  that  we  should  decide 
this  question.  If  we  should  abandon 
the  whole  field  of  providential  superin- 
tendence so  far  as  inspiration  and 
divine  authority  are  concerned  and 
limit  divine  inspiration  and  authority 
to  the  essential  contents  of  the  Bible, 
to  its  religion,  faith,  and  morals,  we 
would  still  have  ample  room  to  seek 
divine  authority  where  alone  it  is 
essential,  or  even  important,  in  the 
teaching  that  guides  our  devotions, 
our  thinlcing,  and  our  conduct." 


speech.  If  the  divine  truth  passed 
through  the  conception  and  imagina- 
tion of  the  human  mind,  did  the  hu- 
nuin  mind  conceive  it  fully,  without 
any  defect,  without  any  fault,  without 
any  shading  of  error  ?  Had  the  hu- 
man conception  no  limitations  to  its 
reception  of  the  divine  truth  V  Had 
the  human  imagination  and  fancy  no 
colors  to  impart  to  the  holy  instruc- 
tion ?  Did  the  human  mind  add  noth- 
ing to  it  in  reasoning  or  in  fancy  ? 
Was  it  delivered  in  its  entirety  exactly 

as  it  was  received  ?" 

"If  the  human  medium  could  liardly 
fail  to  modify  the  divine  truth  received 
by  it  in  revelation,  how  much  more 
must  the  human  medium  inlluence  the 
divine  instruction  in  connection  with 
Biblical  history,  lyric  poetry,  senten- 
ces of  wisdom,  and  works  of  the  imag- 
ination which  make  up  the  body  of  the 
Old  Testament  ?  Here  the  mass  of 
the  material  Avas  derived  from  human 
sources  of  information ;  the  history 
depended  upon  oral  and  documentary 
evidence  ;  the  lyric  poetry  was  the  ex- 
pression of  human  emotion;  the  sen- 
tence of  wisdom  was  the  condensation 
of  human  ethical  experience ;  the 
w^orks  of  the  imagination  wore  efforts 
to  clothe  religious  lessons  in  artistic 
forms  of  grace  and  beauty.  All  we 
can  claim  for  the  Divine  Spirit  in  the 
production  of  these  parts  of  the  Old 
Testament  is  an  inspiration  which  sug- 
gests the  religious  lessons  to  be  im- 
parted."— pp.  G54,  G55. 

In  !Z7ie  North  American  Review,  Jan- 
uary, 1894,  Dr.  BRiGciS  says  : 
"The  question  will  often  be  asked 
in  the  Sunday  Schools  whether  the 
eailier  chapters  of  Genesis  are  real 
historical  narratives  or  whether  they 
contain  historic  facts  embellished  by 
legend,  myth  or  tradition;  whether 
the  poetic  imagination  is  chiefly  re- 
sponsible for  tlie  story  of  creation  and 
paradiso,  and  of  tin*  antediluvians  and 


10 


patriarchs,  endeavoring  to  teach  the 
most  important  lessons  of  the  origin 
of  the  world  of  man,  and  of  sin,  in 
beautiful  pictures  which  are  easily  un- 
derstood."— p.  70. 

"If  these  stories  are  regarded  as 
works  of  the  imagination,  poetic  in 
structure  and  poetic  in  conception  ;  if 
the  days  are  simply  the  frame-work  to 
set  forth  the  general  orderliness  and 
progressiveness  of  the  creation ;  the 
seventh  day  the  appended  conception 
of  a  later  prose  writer  using  the  poem 
of  the  creation  as  the  basis  for  the 
Sabbath  of  the  priestly  law;  if  the 
story  of  the  serpent  and  the  tree  are 
poetical  pictures  of  that  mysterious 
event,  the  first  entrance  of  sin  into 
the  world,  then  the  great  spiritual 
lessons  of  the  creation  and  the  original 
sin  of  man  stand  out  in  attractive 
beauty  and  power  and  bear  witness  to 
their  own  credibility.  It  is  really  im- 
material to  these  lessons  how  far  the 
poetical  embellishment  of  the  stories 
may  extend  or  how  far  it  may  be  in 
accord  with  the  actual  facts  of  the 
case." — p.  71. 


Charge  V. 
The  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  charges  the 
Eev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  being 
a  Minister  of  the  said  Church  and  a 
member  of  the  Presbytery  of  New 
York,  with  teaching  that  Moses  is  not 
the  author  of  the  Pentateuch,  which 
is  contrary  to  direct  statements  of 
Holy  Scripture  and  to  the  essential 
doctrines  of  the  Standards  of  the  said 
Church,  that  the  Holy  Scripture  evi- 
dences itself  to  be  the  word  of  God  by 
the  consent  of  all  the  parts,  and  that 
the  infallible  rule  of  interpretation  of 
Scripture  is  the  Scripture  itself. 

SPECIFICATION. 

In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said   Eev.    Charles   A.   Briggs,  D.  D., 


In  The  North  American  Review,   Jan- 
uary, 1894,  Dr.  BkiCtGS  says: 

"  Biblical  criticism  has  shown  that 
Moses  did  not  write  these  books  and 
that  the  author  is  unknown.  .  .  . 
.  .  It  matters  little  if  a  few  Ameri- 
can professors  in  theological  semi- 
naries renowned  for  their  extreme 
conservatism,  hold  the  traditional 
opinion,  when  the  majority  of  Ameri- 
can Biblical  scholars  agree  with  all  the 
professional  teachers  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment in  all  the  universities  of  Protes- 
tant Europe  that  Moses  did  not  write 

Genesis  and  Exodus If 

the  Sunday-school  teachers  are  con- 
tent to  state  the  facts,  that  the  tradi- 
tional opinion  is  that  Moses  wrote  the 
Pentateuch;    that    modern    criticism 


11 


delivered  at  the  Union  Tliooloj^ieal 
Seminary  in  the  City  of  New  York, 
January  20th,  1891,  on  the  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  tlie  Edward  Robin- 
son Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  publislied  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  approval  of  the  said  Eev. 
Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been 
republished  by  him  in  a  second  edition 
with  a  preface  and  an  appendix,  there 
occurs  the  following  sentence  : 

Page  33,  lines  6-8. 

"  It  may  be  regarded  as  the  certain 
result  of  the  science  of  the  Higher 
Criticism  that  Moses  did  not  write  the 
Pentateuch." 


holds  that  \u^  did  not  write  these 
books;  but  that  the  question  is  unim- 
portant for  the  religious  lessons  of 
these  books ;  he  may  reserve  his  own 
opinion  and  that  of  his  scholars  with 
safety.  But  if  he  undertakes  a  polemic 
against  Modern  Criticism  in  the  in- 
terests of  the  traditional  theory,  and 
nuikes  the  question  a  test  of  ortho- 
doxy, the  divisions  and  heart-burning 
which  are  among  the  ministers  will 
arise  among  the  Sunday-school  teach- 
ers and  scholars;  and  if  he  should 
pursue  the  unwise  course  commended 
by  the  ultra-conservative  teachers  and 
maintain  that  if  Moses  did  not  write 
Genesis  it  cannot  be  inspired,  it  is 
altogether  probable  that  not  a  few 
teachers  and  scholars  may  be  forced 
into  a  dilemma  and  be  compelled  to 
give  up  the  inspiration  of  the  book." 
—p.  68. 

"  The  Sunday-school  teacher  sliould 
be  careful  lest  he  risk  the  credibility 
of  Genesis  with  the  assertion  of  its 
Mosaic  authorship.  He  should  teach 
that  many  of  the  best  modern  critics 
deny  the  Mosaic  authorship  of  Genesis 
and  yet  maintain  its  credibility. "-p.  70. 


Charge  VIII. 
The  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  charges  the 
Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  being  a 
Minister  of  the  said  Church  and  a 
member  of  the  Presbytery  of  New 
York,  with  teaching  that  Sanctification 
is  not  complete  at  death,  which  is  con- 
trary to  the  essential  doctrine  of  Holy 
Scripture  and  of  the  Standards  of  the 
said  Church  that  the  souls  of  believers 
are  at  their  death  at  once  made  per- 
fect in  holiness. 


In  The  Fcrum,  November,  1SU3,  Dr. 

Briggs  says: 

"How  can  he  engage  to  dishonor 
the  reason,  to  divest  himself  of  his  con- 
science, or  to  assent  to  the  unethical 
dogma  of  immediate  sanctification, 
whether  in  this  life  or  in  any  other 
life  ?"— p.  367. 


SPECIFIC  A  TIOX. 

In  an  Inaugural  Address,  which  the 
said  Rev.  Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D., 
delivered   at  the   Union    Theological 


12 


Seminary  in  tlie  City  of  New  York, 
January  20th,  1891,  on  the  occasion  of 
his  induction  into  the  Edward  Robin- 
son Chair  of  Biblical  Theology,  which 
Address  has  been  published  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  with  the  knowl- 
edge and  approval  of  the  said  Rev. 
Charles  A.  Briggs,  D.  D.,  and  has  been 
republished  by  him  in  a  second  edition 
with  a  preface  and  an  appendix,  there 
occur  the  following  sentences  : 

Pages  53,  54,  55  : 

"(c.)  Another  fault  of  Protestant 
theology  is  in  its  limitation  of  the  pro- 
cess of  redemption  to  this  world,  and 
its  neglect  of  those  vast  periods  of 
time  which  have  elapsed  for  most  men 
in  the  Middle  State  between  death 
and  the  resurrection.  The  Roman 
Catholic  Church  is  firmer  here,  though 
it  smears  the  Biblical  doctrine  with 
not  a  few  hurtful  errors.  The  reaction 
against  this  limitation,  as  seen  in  the 
theor}^  of  second  probation,  is  not  sur- 
prising. I  do  not  find  this  doctrine  in 
the  Bible,  but  I  do  find  in  the  Bible 
the  doctrine  of  a  Middle  State  of  con- 
scious higher  life  in  the  communion 
with  Christ  and  the  multitude  of  the 
departed  of  all  ages ;  and  of  the  neces- 
sity of  entire  sanctification,  in  order 
that  the  work  of  redemption  may  be 
completed.  There  is  no  authority  in 
the  Scriptures,  or  in  the  creeds  of 
Christendom,  for  the  doctrine  of  im- 
mediate sanctification  at  death.  The 
only  sanctification  known  to  ex- 
perience, to  Christian  orthodoxy,  and 
to  the  Bible,  is  progressive  sanctifica- 
tion. Progressive  sanctification  after 
death,  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible  and 
the  Church  ;  and  it  is  of  vast  impor- 
tance in  our  times  that  we  should 
understand  it,  and  live  in  accordance 
with  it.  The  bugbear  of  a  judgment 
immediately  after  death,  and  the 
illusion  of  a  magical  transformation  in 
the  dying  hour,  should  be  banished 
from  the  world.      They  are  conceits 


13 


derived  from  the  Ethnic  religions,  and 
without  basis  in  the  Bible  or  Christian 
experience  as  expressed  in  the  symbols 
of  the  Church.  The  former  makes 
death  a  terror  to  the  best  of  men,  the 
latter  makes  human  life  and  experi- 
ence of  no  effect ;  and  both  cut  the 
nerves  of  Christian  activity  and  striv- 
ing after  sanctification.  Renouncing 
them  as  liurtful,  unchristian  errors, 
we  look  with  hope  and  joy  for  the  con- 
tinuation of  the  processes  of  grace, 
and  the  wonders  of  redemption  in  the 
company  of  the  blessed,  to  which  the 
faithful  are  all  hastening." 

Inaugural  Address,  Appendix,  2d  ed., 
pages  107,  108 :  "  Sanctification  has 
two  sides — a  negative  and  a  positive — 
mortification  and  vivification ;  tlie 
former  is  manward,  the  latter  is  God- 
ward.  Believers  who  enter  the  middle 
state,  enter  guiltless  ;  they  are  par- 
doned and  justified  ;  they  are  mantled 
in  the  blood  and  righteousness  of 
Chri^ ;  and  nothing  will  be  able  to 
separate  them  from  His  love.  They 
are  also  delivered  from  all  temptations 
such  as  spring  from  without,  from  the 
world  and  the  devil.  They  are  en- 
circled with  influences  for  good  such 
as  they  have  never  enjoj'ed  before. 
But  they  are  still  the  same  persons, 
with  all  the  gifts  and  graces,  and  also 
the  same  habits  of  mind,  disposition 
and  temper  they  had  Avhen  they  left 
the  world.  Death  destroys  the  body. 
It  does  not  change  the  moral  and 
religious  nature  of  man.  It  is  un- 
psychological  and  unethical  to  suppose 
that  the  character  of  the  disembodied 
spirit  will  all  be  changed  in  the  moment 
of  death.  It  is  the  Manichean  lieresy 
to  hold  that  sin  belongs  to  the  physi- 
cal organization  and  is  laid  aside  with 
the  body.  If  this  were  so,  how  can 
any  of  our  race  carry  their  evil  natures 
with  them  into  the  middle  state  and 
incur  the  punishment  of  their  sins  ? 
The   eternal    punishment    of    a    man 


14 


whose  evil  nature  has  been  stripped 
from  him  bj^  death  and  left  in  the 
grave,  is  an  absurdity.  The  Plj-mouth 
Brethren  hold  that  there  are  two 
natures  in  the  redeemed — the  old  man 
and  the  new.  In  accordance  with  such 
a  theory-,  the  old  man  might  be  cast 
off  at  death.  But  this  is  only  a  more 
subtile  kind  of  Manicheism,  which  has 
ever  been  regarded  as  heretical.  Sin, 
as  our  Saviour  teaches,  has  its  source 
in  the  lieart — in  the  higher  and  im- 
mortal part  of  man.  It  is  the  work  of 
sanctification  to  overcome  sin  in  the 
higher  nature." 


V 


m 


1 


